Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That's like saying math isn't science.A computer model is not "Science" LOL
The computer model predicted Cat 5 in the Gulf the last 4 years
OOpsies
Why would you use a method you believe to be incorrect? That doesn't make sense. Please explain.You are assuming that the functional relationship between CO2 levels in the air and and ocean Ph is and has always been the same. That seems like an oversimplification to me. You yourself have stated that there are many other factors influencing ocean PH.
DUMASS, your side has tried and still tries to use past climate to dictate current trends in climate.... Moron! THis is your sides methods, got that yet you insufferable idiot?
Great, nice way to show your immaturity...... Do you think being a deliberate idiot will save face now? please keep it up...
I have no journal publications yet. I have given talks on the flux-limited diffusion approximation for radiation hydrodynamics, models of super-eddington accretion in binary stars, as well as presented my proposed thesis topic along the same lines. If you are interested I could send you copies, just have to take my name out to protect my anonymity.No I don't have to the OP tried to do that you imbecile!!! And as far as my publications where are yours retard???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! sure buddy sure... BTW, what's up with the lack of critical thinking and ability to follow a simple web forum debate? And why the childish nonsense you just tried above? Why were you as a science major working towards a PHD unaware of CO2 ocean acidification theory? As I recall the natural sciences are a prerequisite to any science major let alone doctorate? And as a PHD candidate you are a masters holder? And that is in what pray tell? Certainly it would have entailed some form of critical thinking training or logical teachings?
Yeah.... Sure buddy sure... truly pathetic, how old are you? 12?
Jesus christ you are an idiot..... Do you even understand any of this?
Do you have anything to offer other than insults?
I couldn't possibly know more than you, because you know everything.assured you are neither a PHD candidate or even know anything about astro-physics.....
And since you do, can you help me out? I'm trying to figure out how to model super-eddington flows without relativity - the problem is the radiation pressure pushes the velocities towards infinity. Any ideas?
Stocks of foodstuff are dangerously low
Low stocks of foodstuff make the world's falling agriculture output particularly worrisome. The combined averaged of the ending stock levels of the major trading countries of Australia, Canada, United States, and the European Union have been declining steadily in the last few years:
Catastrophic Fall in 2009 Global Food Production
2002-2005: 47.4 million tons
2007: 37.6 million tons
2008: 27.4 million tons
These inventory numbers are dangerously low, especially considering the horrifying possibility that China's 60 million tons of grain reserves doesn't actually exists .
That's like saying math isn't science.
Not at all, CrusaderFrank is saying that a computer model isn't exact science.
That's like saying math isn't exact science.
I couldn't possibly know more than you, because you know everything.assured you are neither a PHD candidate or even know anything about astro-physics.....
And since you do, can you help me out? I'm trying to figure out how to model super-eddington flows without relativity - the problem is the radiation pressure pushes the velocities towards infinity. Any ideas?
Nice response..... Really showed your age here asshole.... Completely ignore the points raised and try to sell your new scientist persona.. Do you really think this will save you? HAHHHAHAHAHA!
I couldn't possibly know more than you, because you know everything.assured you are neither a PHD candidate or even know anything about astro-physics.....
And since you do, can you help me out? I'm trying to figure out how to model super-eddington flows without relativity - the problem is the radiation pressure pushes the velocities towards infinity. Any ideas?
Nice response..... Really showed your age here asshole.... Completely ignore the points raised and try to sell your new scientist persona.. Do you really think this will save you? HAHHHAHAHAHA!
Old socks, you post crap like this and you know I am going to call you on it....
First its nonsense.... And here is the real science on it....
Real science bit #1: 550 million years ago in the Cambrian era there was 20 times as much CO2 in the atmosphere as there is today. And the Cambrian era is the time in which calcite corals and similar lifeforms first achieved algal symbiosis.
Real science bit #2: 175 million years ago in the Jurassic era there was also 20 times the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and at this time the Aragonite corals came into being. So we have two points in history which had greater CO2 in the atmosphere and at both points we find coral life forms developing rather than dying off...... So either the oceans didn't turn acidic and kill them with 20 times the amount of CO2 in the air, or CO2 has no real measurable impact on PH to the extent if effecting the oceans like they claim. Either way its insane....
Real science bit #3: The oceans already have 70 times the amount of CO2 that is in the atmosphere. Even if by some freak occurrence all of the CO2 we emit unnaturally were to go straight into the ocean (an impossibility) it would only raise the CO2 concentrations by 1%. Not exactly the scary horror stories you are telling now is it...
Real science bit #4: CO2 is the 7th largest particle in the oceans by volume that could in theory effect the PH balance. Meaning there are 6 other elements before CO2 which could in theory do the same to the PH. In practice this means the likelihood of CO2 actually causing oceans acidification is minuscule at best even IF the theory is correct. If you want to be real technical on it CO2 would not alter the PH at all but rather buffer other elements which could possibly make some impact on the PH balance. Those impacts are minuscule given the depth and scope of the entire thing.
Real science bit #5: The ocean rides over vast amounts of alkali. We are talking vast amounts of alkali stone, rock and soil which the oceans stir up and roll over 24/7... Alkali is the acid stopper in case you weren't aware.
All of this garbage is theoretical crap all designed to scare you... Its about as much to do with real science as the Pope has to do with Las Vegas nightlife...
oh please ask me for my evidence again..... LOL, I love it when you try and play climatologist to save your azz....
That's like saying math isn't science.A computer model is not "Science" LOL
The computer model predicted Cat 5 in the Gulf the last 4 years
OOpsies
No, it's like saying, "Subject your hypothesis to laboratory testing" In fact, it IS saying "test your Hypothesis in a lab!"!
There's no more real math to the study of Global Warming than there is to Palmistry.
That's like saying math isn't science.
No, it's like saying, "Subject your hypothesis to laboratory testing" In fact, it IS saying "test your Hypothesis in a lab!"!
Not all hypothesis can be tested in labs. Some are tested through direct observation of natural phenomena outside the lab - e.g. the existence of black holes, for instance, cannot be verified in a lab.
There's no more real math to the study of Global Warming than there is to Palmistry.
Are you telling my systems of ordinary differential equations don't qualify as "real math" ?
No dumass I think YOU are incapable of scientific and critical thought...
Louisiana State University is in Baton Rouge and they do have an Astrophysics department. Just saying. 77 students.
Rotating or nonrotating ST?
I couldn't possibly know more than you, because you know everything.
And since you do, can you help me out? I'm trying to figure out how to model super-eddington flows without relativity - the problem is the radiation pressure pushes the velocities towards infinity. Any ideas?
Nice response..... Really showed your age here asshole.... Completely ignore the points raised and try to sell your new scientist persona.. Do you really think this will save you? HAHHHAHAHAHA!
Oh irony, your first post in the thread. Very mature response here
Old socks, you post crap like this and you know I am going to call you on it....
First its nonsense.... And here is the real science on it....
Real science bit #1: 550 million years ago in the Cambrian era there was 20 times as much CO2 in the atmosphere as there is today. And the Cambrian era is the time in which calcite corals and similar lifeforms first achieved algal symbiosis.
Real science bit #2: 175 million years ago in the Jurassic era there was also 20 times the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and at this time the Aragonite corals came into being. So we have two points in history which had greater CO2 in the atmosphere and at both points we find coral life forms developing rather than dying off...... So either the oceans didn't turn acidic and kill them with 20 times the amount of CO2 in the air, or CO2 has no real measurable impact on PH to the extent if effecting the oceans like they claim. Either way its insane....
Real science bit #3: The oceans already have 70 times the amount of CO2 that is in the atmosphere. Even if by some freak occurrence all of the CO2 we emit unnaturally were to go straight into the ocean (an impossibility) it would only raise the CO2 concentrations by 1%. Not exactly the scary horror stories you are telling now is it...
Real science bit #4: CO2 is the 7th largest particle in the oceans by volume that could in theory effect the PH balance. Meaning there are 6 other elements before CO2 which could in theory do the same to the PH. In practice this means the likelihood of CO2 actually causing oceans acidification is minuscule at best even IF the theory is correct. If you want to be real technical on it CO2 would not alter the PH at all but rather buffer other elements which could possibly make some impact on the PH balance. Those impacts are minuscule given the depth and scope of the entire thing.
Real science bit #5: The ocean rides over vast amounts of alkali. We are talking vast amounts of alkali stone, rock and soil which the oceans stir up and roll over 24/7... Alkali is the acid stopper in case you weren't aware.
All of this garbage is theoretical crap all designed to scare you... Its about as much to do with real science as the Pope has to do with Las Vegas nightlife...
oh please ask me for my evidence again..... LOL, I love it when you try and play climatologist to save your azz....
It's beyond our power to make a black hole of any meaningful size, but any HS Science class can put a teaspoon of dry ice in a covered fish tank and see it the temperature goes up from the slight increases in CO2 like you claim it does
Louisiana State University is in Baton Rouge and they do have an Astrophysics department. Just saying. 77 students.
Rotating or nonrotating ST?
Is what rotating? The stars?
I thought they were making small black holes at the particle accelerator in Europe?
No dumass I think YOU are incapable of scientific and critical thought...
Hey at least I can spell the word "dumb ass" correctly,
DUMB ASS
Louisiana State University is in Baton Rouge and they do have an Astrophysics department. Just saying. 77 students.
Rotating or nonrotating ST?
Is what rotating? The stars?
Jig's up Spiderman Tuba. I just outed you.
